Latest news with #PaulaVennells
The Guardian
10-05-2025
- Entertainment
- The Guardian
‘Oh my God, she's been buried!': Mr Bates star Monica Dolan on Paula Vennells, playing heroes and villains, and why TV is getting more generic
Monica Dolan is so gentle and unassuming that, sitting in a giant armchair in a London hotel, she looks as if she could be swallowed up by its upholstery. But then, the Middlesbrough-born 56-year-old has made her name dissolving into roles – especially those inspired by real people. She won a Bafta for her chilling performance as serial killer Rose West in 2011's Appropriate Adult, and rave reviews for her turn as kooky life insurance scammer Anne Darwin in The Thief, His Wife and the Canoe. Last year, her appearance in ITV's Mr Bates vs the Post Office as the fierce Jo Hamilton – the post office operator who faced criminal charges when a computer system failure led to her and hundreds of others being wrongly accused of theft – became a national talking point. The four-part British drama, which aired in January 2024, prompted public outrage. In the aftermath of the show, the former Post Office chief executive Paula Vennells handed back her CBE and the government was pressed into launching a new compensation scheme. You won best supporting actress at the Baftas 13 years ago. Now you're nominated again. Does it feel different this time? It's a bit like when you go back to your first school and the chairs look really small. Whereas before I felt like I was trying to get into a world, now I feel slightly more like I'm, hopefully, in it – and welcoming other people as well. Mr Bates vs the Post Office caused real-world action. How did it feel when that played out? I was shocked by the audience reaction, and how proud I was of the audience reaction. I saw that the compensation, promised after the show's success, is taking longer than post office operators were hoping. They've actually re-engaged the subpostmasters in a process where they have to apply, and this is what those people have been doing for years. And it's just not fair to make them do it again. They don't trust it any more. I've got a friend whose auntie has just said: 'It's taken up enough of my life.' She's not even trying to get the money. She doesn't want to go through it. You've played a lot of real people. Does that come with extra responsibility? Oh yeah! One of the most moving days of my career was when we went to Bafta to the screening of Mr Bates vs the Post Office. There was going to be a Q&A. Lots of subpostmasters were there. What if they had turned around and said: 'That's not our story at all and you've misrepresented us'? At the same time, the first duty is to the script. Nobody knows the whole truth of any situation. Are you and Jo Hamilton still in touch? Yes, she texted me yesterday. We're both very into our dogs. What's your opinion of Paula Vennells after making the show? I listened to the first day of the inquiry, when Paula was giving evidence. I thought: 'Right, this is where she gets exposed.' Then Rishi Sunak resigned, so I was like: 'Oh my God, she's been buried.' Then I thought, she's so lucky. What's the most research you've done to play a real person? When I played Rosemary West, I went to her solicitor and got the transcript of the court case, which the TV company hadn't managed to do. What's the secret to playing a villain? Don't deliberately not want to be liked, otherwise you end up twirling a moustache. There's been a lot of talk about a funding crisis in British drama. Have you felt the effects of that? Well, I've definitely felt that the things that I've been doing have been very stripped back and, you know, there isn't a lot. At the best of times, there's a fear of taking risks but now, particularly, people aren't even pitching things they would have pitched a couple of years ago. There seems to be more push with the scripts I read, making them generic. What TV shows have you been enjoying at the moment?Smoggie Queens. It's about inclusivity and finding another family than your birth family, and it's extremely funny as well. There are so many things in it that appeal to everyone, but there are certain jokes that you'd only get if you're from Middlesbrough. What's your guilty pleasure TV show? Dogs Behaving (Very) Badly Australia. In the whole of Australia, they couldn't find anyone to train their dogs apart from Graeme Hall, this bloke from Yorkshire! I watch it if I need cheering up. The Bafta Television Awards with P&O Cruises is on BBC One and BBC iPlayer tomorrow at 7pm. Catch the full lineup of our Bafta TV special launching across the weekend and starring best actor nominees David Tennant, Lennie James, Monica Dolan, Billie Piper, Richard Gadd, Marisa Abela and Sharon D Clarke Read more in the series
BBC News
06-05-2025
- Business
- BBC News
Post Office: Press watchdog revises ruling against ex-Fujitsu CEO
Post Office: Press watchdog revises ruling against ex-Fujitsu CEO Michael Keegan was chief executive of Fujitsu UK from May 2014 to June 2015 A separate part of the complaint remains upheld for which the newspaper published a correction three years ago. It is the first time the watchdog has revisited one of its published findings on the basis of new information. The Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso) now says the Sunday Times had not been misleading when it reported that Michael Keegan had been "central" to Fujitsu's dealings with the Post Office, reversing a ruling it made in 2022. A press complaint by a former Fujitsu CEO about his role in the Post Office scandal has been partly overturned by the industry watchdog following new information uncovered by a BBC investigation. Paula Vennells was chief executive of the Post Office from 2012 to 2019 Ipso said Mr Keegan told it, as part of its original investigation in 2022, that he had only met former Post Office chief Paula Vennells once and "that he had no ongoing relationship with her; and that he did not discuss or give her any assurances regarding Horizon's capabilities". But last year BBC News revealed Mr Keegan had in fact had four meetings with her during his 13 months heading up Fujitsu UK from May 2014 to June 2015. Two of these were face-to-face meetings and the other two were telephone calls, one of which concerned a BBC Panorama investigation into the scandal. Mr Keegan now accepts the new information shows he met Ms Vennells more than once. But he told Ipso the number of times he met or spoke to her was "immaterial" to his complaint and that he had not played a "central role", as reported by the Sunday Times. Ipso's Complaints Committee was not persuaded and found that the newspaper had not been "inaccurate" or "misleading" when it said Mr Keegan had played a "central role" or been "central" to Fujitsu's dealings with the Post Office during his time in charge. Part of the dispute about the Sunday Times' reporting centred around comments by Ms Vennells that the Horizon IT system used by the Post Office was like "Fort Knox", a quote she attributed to an ex-CEO of contractor Fujitsu. The Post Office has previously tried to argue that branch accounts could only be changed by sub-postmasters. It has since emerged that they could be accessed remotely. The Sunday Times identified Mr Keegan as the source of the quote, but acknowledged it was mistaken when IPSO first investigated in 2022. Between 1999 and 2015, more than 900 sub-postmasters were wrongly prosecuted after the faulty Horizon software made it look like money was missing from Post Office branch accounts. Mr Keegan told BBC News: "Any judgement about the Horizon scandal should await the findings of the inquiry. "The fact I had one additional meeting with the CEO of the Post Office on an entirely unrelated matter, some 11 years ago, does not in my view call into question the original decision Ipso reached. I am pleased that Ipso upheld its original decision in relation to the inaccuracy of the earlier article in The Sunday Times". Last year lawyers for Mr Keegan said he regrets that sub-postmasters were prosecuted unfairly and denied playing any part in it. A spokesperson for Ipso declined to comment.
Daily Mail
25-04-2025
- Business
- Daily Mail
Post Office forks out eye-watering £600m to keep using faulty Horizon system despite IT scandal and decision to ditch its creator Fujitsu 10 years ago!
The Post Office has paid an astonishing £600m-plus for its hopelessly flawed Horizon computer system - since deciding to get rid of it. Fujitsu had won a £548m contract to provide the money-handling Information Technology system in 1999 in the first place. In total the Post Office has paid a mind-boggling £2.5bn for Horizon. Consistent glitches in the software led to 700 postmasters being convicted of pocketing the money for themselves, from the launch of Horizon to 2015, with dozens jailed. Thousands more were forced to pay non-existent shortfalls Yet the Government only finally got to grips with the scandal last year, following the broadcast of ITV drama Mr Bates vs The Post Office. Disgraced former Post Office chief executive Paula Vennells was stripped of her CBE in the programme's wake, her crocodile tears while giving evidence at the Post Office Inquiry drawing little sympathy. A bill was finally fast-tracked through parliament to quash most of the convictions involving Horizon. Yet despite their exoneration, many postmasters still await compensation. Meanwhile, the very firm behind Horizon has continued making a mint from its shoddy product. According to the BBC, since the Post Office decided to replace Horizon in 2012, it has paid Japanese firm Fujitsu more than £600m, on top of the £548m agreed in the first place by Tony Blair's Labour Government, and numerous other interim payments. Horizon is still being used now, with no replacement ready – and it is claimed that Prime Minister Blair had been warned that the contract terms with Fujitsu would potentially make it difficult for the Post Office to break it off without huge expense. And because Horizon is still in use, problems continue, with seven in ten sub-postmasters last year surveyed by the Post Office Inquiry saying it still produced 'unexplained discrepancies' in accounts. The Post Office long accepted Fujitsu's false assurances there were no problems with the IT system, despite mounting evidence, and ploughed on with wrongful private prosecutions, even when it did seek an improvement, the 1999 contract proved a problem. Before the deal was signed, Premier Sir Tony Blair had been warned in May 1999 there was an issue over the fact that Fujitsu would retain ownership of Horizon software computer code. As a result, a document reveals, the premier was advised that if the Post Office tried to switch to another IT firm, Fujitsu 'would be in a strong position to drive a costly settlement'. Then-chancellor Gordon Brown was also sent a document raising the issue over the ownership of the computer code, it is claimed. Yet the then-Labour Government signed the contract regardless. It meant the Post Office did not own the key computer code at Horizon's heart, and had 18,000 branches reliant upon it. So when it wanted to switch to a different IT firm in 2012, it was left with a choice of paying a price for that code set by Fujitsu – or forking out for entirely new software, at vast cost. Computing expert Jason Coyne, who was at the forefront of exposing flaws in the Post Office computer system, says it was 'madness' to take on Horizon while not owning its software programme. The Post Office finally bought the rights to the by-then-infamous computer code in 2023, for a 'cheap' £10m, and it is understood it may be used as a basis for a replacement. Even so, it is feared even more tens of millions will end up being handed over the Fujitsu after the current extension agreement with the firm expires next March. A spokesman for Sir Tony Blair would not discuss the details of the Horizon contract discussions in 1999, but said everything was taken 'very seriously'. The spokesman added: 'The final decision was taken after an investigation by an independent panel recommended it was viable. 'It is now clear that the Horizon product was seriously flawed, leading to tragic and completely unacceptable consequences, and Mr Blair has deep sympathy with all those affected.' A spokesman for Gordon Brown said he would not have seen the memo about the contract, with it only sent to his office as a 'formality'. The fact no-one had refused to accept Fujitsu retaining ownership of the software code meant that by 2013, according to documents unearthed in the Post Office Inquiry, executives were being warned it meant 'we may be unable to agree…with Fujitsu on reasonable terms'. And in 2016, a year after the last Horizon-based prosecution of a postmaster, Fujitsu's ownership appears likely to have scuppered talks with the IBM computing giant over it being brought in instead. Procurement contracts expert Ian Makgill said: 'Fujitsu were fighting the whole time to protect their investment and their intellectual property, rather than looking after the interests of the sub-postmasters.' Fujitsu has declined to discuss details of it control of Horizon, but said it is 'focused on supporting the Post Office in their plans for a new service delivery model'. Fujitsu's total of some 200 contracts with the Government over the last decade alone amount to £6.7bn, and counting. It means the creator of Horizon continues coining it in long since the Post Office scandal was becoming widely known, let alone to its postmaster victims including campaign leader Sir Alan Bates, knighted last year after the success of the drama in which he was played by actor Toby Jones. A Post Office spokesperson told the Daily Mail a move away from Horizon and Fujitsu was ongoing, adding: 'Post Office has a five-year plan to deliver a 'new deal for postmasters' and put the organisation on a solid footing for future success. 'We are looking at Post Office's technology and data strategically, to ensure that we reduce central costs and provide postmasters with the tools they need to serve their customers and run profitable businesses into the future.'
Yahoo
25-03-2025
- Yahoo
We need to value and celebrate our boys. Let's not behave like they're all latent misogynists
Unless they make a TV drama about an issue, it doesn't exist. That is where we are now. It took Mr Bates vs The Post Office for people to gasp: 'But this was horrendous!', for the prime minister to announce new legislation to exonerate wrongly convicted subpostmasters and former Post Office CEO Paula Vennells to have her CBE withdrawn. It took Baby Reindeer for us all to realise that, yes, women stalk men too! And maybe it's time we started taking it seriously? Then there's the hit new Netflix show Adolescence, which shines a light on the corrosive impact of social media and misogynistic influencers on teenage boys – and has taken this phenomenon to an almost comedic level. Like coma patients, who have awoken from a 25-year slumber, we're all suddenly up in arms about this thing called 'The Internet'. 'These boys who spend their days and nights immersed in a toxic online culture,' came the mass musings. 'What if it's not good for them?' I think it may very well not be. And we could probably have come to this conclusion sooner. But an awakening is still an awakening, and while the scientists, sociologists and mental health campaigners who have been telling us this for decades beat their heads against the wall, everyone has been busy coming up with solutions to this 'new' problem. One, reported on Sunday, is the introduction of 'counter misogyny classes' at school. As part of a concerted effort to quash the growing influence of toxic figures such as Andrew Tate, and broader 'incel culture', the Government is to include this guidance in relationships, health and sex education lessons (RHSE) before the end of the academic year. With content expected to include everything from 'the real-life complexities of romantic and sexual relationships' to 'how to manage difficult emotions that can relate to relationships – including disappointment or anger as well as the influence of online misogynistic content and the impact of pornography on sexual behaviour', this should only be a step forward. A positive thing. So why does the idea fill me with dread? The truth is that I've lost all confidence in schools – or, at least, in their ability to behave sensibly with sensitive issues such as these. We've seen what happened with inclusivity and gender teachings. One minute we're nodding sagely along to the principle of our child being taught about equal opportunities and respect for all, the next that child is being taught that he or she is innately racist, sexist and exclusionary. Introducing the idea that we shouldn't feel bound or imprisoned by socially constructed gender characteristics is obviously a good thing. We are all very different. Only suddenly children are being told to put their biological gender in doubt, and that they can in fact pick from 72 different kinds, if they want. Why should these anti-misogyny classes be any different? Because I can imagine all too clearly what the narrative might become. As with critical race theory, we'd have teachers telling young boys that they are inherently misogynistic. That they can only be cleansed of this natural toxicity if they shed all characteristically male attributes and become more like girls. And this would only compound the problem. Boys have had enough of being told that they are the bad apples. Every statistic now reflects how detrimental that strategy has been, from their worsening academic performance to their school drop-out rates. We now know that 550,000 young men are not in work, education or training, and that for the first time in history, young men are earning less than women (by nine per cent). It's because they no longer feel that there is a place for them out there in the world – where their loud voices may cause upset and their preference for directness is construed as 'aggressive' – that they have been driven underground towards the likes of Tate. If we are genuinely trying to quash the rise of misogyny in boys and young men, we should be looking at what they find so appealing about 'manosphere' influencers. And by the way, the answer to that is simple: it's about value. These cynical, money-making scumbags have only got where they are by making boys feel valued. We can do that too. We can show them that they are valued for what they are, and not what they could or should be if they change everything about themselves 'to fit'. That alone would take away so much resentment and allow a respect for women to flourish. But if Starmer – who has apparently been watching Adolescence with his two teenagers – really wants to make an immediate difference, he knows what he has to do: ditch the cowardly 'we'll leave it up to you' stance and ban mobile phones in schools. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
25-03-2025
- Telegraph
We need to value and celebrate our boys. Let's not behave like they're all latent misogynists
Unless they make a TV drama about an issue, it doesn't exist. That is where we are now. It took Mr Bates vs The Post Office for people to gasp: 'But this was horrendous!', for the prime minister to announce new legislation to exonerate wrongly convicted subpostmasters and former Post Office CEO Paula Vennells to have her CBE withdrawn. It took Baby Reindeer for us all to realise that, yes, women stalk men too! And maybe it's time we started taking it seriously? Then there's the hit new Netflix show Adolescence, which shines a light on the corrosive impact of social media and misogynistic influencers on teenage boys – and has taken this phenomenon to an almost comedic level. Like coma patients, who have awoken from a 25-year slumber, we're all suddenly up in arms about this thing called 'The Internet'. 'These boys who spend their days and nights immersed in a toxic online culture,' came the mass musings. 'What if it's not good for them?' I think it may very well not be. And we could probably have come to this conclusion sooner. But an awakening is still an awakening, and while the scientists, sociologists and mental health campaigners who have been telling us this for decades beat their heads against the wall, everyone has been busy coming up with solutions to this 'new' problem. One, reported on Sunday, is the introduction of 'counter misogyny classes' at school. As part of a concerted effort to quash the growing influence of toxic figures such as Andrew Tate, and broader ' incel culture ', the Government is to include this guidance in relationships, health and sex education lessons (RHSE) before the end of the academic year. With content expected to include everything from 'the real-life complexities of romantic and sexual relationships' to 'how to manage difficult emotions that can relate to relationships – including disappointment or anger as well as the influence of online misogynistic content and the impact of pornography on sexual behaviour', this should only be a step forward. A positive thing. So why does the idea fill me with dread? The truth is that I've lost all confidence in schools – or, at least, in their ability to behave sensibly with sensitive issues such as these. We've seen what happened with inclusivity and gender teachings. One minute we're nodding sagely along to the principle of our child being taught about equal opportunities and respect for all, the next that child is being taught that he or she is innately racist, sexist and exclusionary. Introducing the idea that we shouldn't feel bound or imprisoned by socially constructed gender characteristics is obviously a good thing. We are all very different. Only suddenly children are being told to put their biological gender in doubt, and that they can in fact pick from 72 different kinds, if they want. Why should these anti-misogyny classes be any different? Because I can imagine all too clearly what the narrative might become. As with critical race theory, we'd have teachers telling young boys that they are inherently misogynistic. That they can only be cleansed of this natural toxicity if they shed all characteristically male attributes and become more like girls. And this would only compound the problem. Boys have had enough of being told that they are the bad apples. Every statistic now reflects how detrimental that strategy has been, from their worsening academic performance to their school drop-out rates. We now know that 550,000 young men are not in work, education or training, and that for the first time in history, young men are earning less than women (by nine per cent). It's because they no longer feel that there is a place for them out there in the world – where their loud voices may cause upset and their preference for directness is construed as 'aggressive' – that they have been driven underground towards the likes of Tate. If we are genuinely trying to quash the rise of misogyny in boys and young men, we should be looking at what they find so appealing about 'manosphere' influencers. And by the way, the answer to that is simple: it's about value. These cynical, money-making scumbags have only got where they are by making boys feel valued. We can do that too. We can show them that they are valued for what they are, and not what they could or should be if they change everything about themselves 'to fit'. That alone would take away so much resentment and allow a respect for women to flourish. But if Starmer – who has apparently been watching Adolescence with his two teenagers – really wants to make an immediate difference, he knows what he has to do: ditch the cowardly 'we'll leave it up to you' stance and ban mobile phones in schools.
